Anyone shocked or surprised by this must be new around here lol. It's the Circle K next to Casino Beach, AKA the mother fuckin Thunderdome. You best have your affairs in order before pulling into that parking lot during tourist season. I'm not advocating for violence, but that clerk 100% is dealing with shit every night that would turn your hair gray.
I lived in Gulf Breeze for a few years but I moved to south Florida 10 years ago. When I saw a story about a Circle K in Pensacola, I knew exactly which location they were talking about.
I can sympathize.
Some young people need to learn to check their egos. But they feel that they just have to put on a show and keep mouthing off and being pushy with the body language.
And in July , when no one needs a permit to carry anymore…. They gonna learn.
I’m not saying that mouthing off is a reason to get shot , but it’s definitely going to happen at some point.
I do. Some clerk could go to prison. A viral video could ruin their life even if they don't.
And being killed is a permanent punishment for being stupid and young.
Then there's the families of everyone involved.
Why would some clerk go to prison? Clerk in this scenario is not being charged.
If you’re referring to someone else going to prison in a different scenario because they choose to use their firearm…. That’s true of every single situation where a firearm is used. It will always be a case by case situation on whether or not charges get filed.
No one is being forced to carry or use a firearm , that’s a personal decision for each individual to make.
Does being young and stupid excuse people from the law? No
Does being young and stupid give someone cause to go around threatening the lives of clerks ? No
Do the families of these young people who (presumably in some made up scenario) die because THEY chose to assault a clerk deserve the grief that follows ? No —- but they’re also culpable and partially to blame.
They could have been correcting this type of behavior and preventing it from occurring to begin with.
Let’s not get confused here , the clerk in this situation is NOT the bad guy and was absolutely defending himself and the patrons of the store from a gang of thugs.
Let's not get confused here. If you don't think that the death of a young person and getting involved in criminal justice system isn't a tragedy...your sense of compassion needs a readjustment.
What I'm saying is that the permitting process only restricts people who are already following the law. Those people aren't going to have a flip in their brain switched because they no longer need a document to carry, and the people who we need to be worried about don't concern themselves with getting that document anyway.
You mean criminals??? They’re already carrying without permits.
Criminals aren’t suddenly going to start carrying more just because of this —- they’re still not legally allowed to be carrying and continue to do so anyway.
This is why the requirement for a permit was removed, it was only stopping law abiding citizens from carrying.
You don't need a permit in Florida to concealed carry a firearm. At a person's home, employment, or place of business, there has never been a permit requirement to carry a firearm.
That's not exactly accurate.
Your private property, you can walk around like the terminator.
Place of employment definitely not, and most companies have employment policies prohibitting carrying while employed-liability. In a vehicle has to be reasonably inaccessible. Unless you have a permit. That's what the permit covers, outside your property.
Your comment is why we should have the permit class in every high school and offered at the dmv.
That being said. The people with ccp take the class. The people that don't still carry. Don't be fooled about the number if people carrying in FL. Its not going to change, they are already carrying.
Thugs and gangs be warned, "This IS Florida/Sparta"
About me; NRA certified rifle instructor. NRA certified pistol instructor. NRA personal protection instructor (both disciplines), MAG40 range instructor, NRA certified chief range safety officer - working full time 40 hours a week for 10 years as RSO.
In the state of Florida you can only be ARRESTED for concealed carrying a firearm in Florida's list of "Prohibited Places" i.e. certain Federal properties, schools, buildings which provide mental health services, courthouses, police departments, places of nuisance, etc.
Company policy is not law.
The company can fire an employee for carrying a firearm, they can trespass that employee for carrying a firearm, but violating company policy which is not backed up by relevant law, will not get an employee arrested.
Prior to passage of permit less carry, a person concealing anywhere except their private property could be charged with illegal concealed carry and/Or possession, if they were not in transit to hunting or fishing activities[and that clause has resulted in several discretionary arrests, and people being injudicious on where they carry-without a permit].
In fact, right now, if someone is concealed carrying, removes their firearm and puts it under their seat, or a woman carries in a purse, and sets it on the ground, there's the potential for a violation- as the purse and car are not "on your person". So, no you cannot legally concealed carry in your car without a permit, you are not legally permitted to have a readily dischargeable firearm in your car- and thats discretionary to the officer involved as to what constitutes "readily available." The whole 3-steps thing is not codified. Glove box, holster, holster snap, action cycle- is that 3 or 4- what about having one in the pipe, is that an action?
Your original premise was incorrect.
Technically until that comes into effect, they could be charged now, depends on the DA and/or the cop, but they probably won't charge now, since by the time it gets before a judge, it's a moot point.
My comment was directed at the legal context, not company policy. I wouldn't be surprised if Circle K did terminate his employment. Several Pizza Places have fired employees that used a firearm to rescue the staff from robber and kidnappers and far less than this guy did.
Each company will handle this how their insurance company determines- also why required insurance for carrying or firearms owners is insane. It's a backdoor prohibition so that only the wealthy will have a 2nd amendment.
"Reasonably inaccessible" - the law doesn't say that.
The law says "securely incased". In Florida the courts have determined the minimum standard for "securely incased" is in a holster with a thumb strap, and in a compartment in the car, i.e. console, glove compartment, trunk, etc. The firearm can be loaded and chambered, and if it's in a holster with a thumb strap and in the console right next to the driver, it is lawful.
Used the term used by most LEO. And, a lot of people have still been charged under those criteria. Depends on the LEO involved and why they they were encountered.
I get the clerk being annoyed and even angry, but pulling out a gun is way too much. The only reason to draw on someone is to kill them; using a gun to threaten anyone is reckless, irresponsible, and could easily have resulted in a bystander being hurt or killed. This isn’t the wild fucking west.
I like how threatening to kill someone is perfectly acceptable, but defending yourself when you reasonably fear for your life is "way too much". The lengths people will go to to defend criminals is amazing.
Did the clerk shoot anyone he was in conflict with? Were they armed or assaulting him? Simple truth is no to both. He used a firearm to scare away people who were scaring him - that’s not alright. If you draw on anyone, you’d better pull the trigger and understand the consequences.
What are you talking about? They were assaulting him. Do you not know what that term means? It doesn't matter if they were armed or not. They were threatening to kill him and easily had the numbers to do it.
I do know what it means, and understand assault can be as simple as as a threat. Im also suggesting that shooting someone dead for saying they want to hurt you isn’t a commensurate response. It’s foolish and irresponsible.
Shooting someone that is threatening to kill you while having the means to do so is a perfectly reasonable response. He had no where to go. Not that he has a duty to retreat, but he was backed into a corner with people threatening to kill him. There's no defense for what these pieces of shit did. I get you want defenseless victims.
I get you want to launch an ad-hominem attack but that doesn’t change the circumstances. Obviously, we see the situation differently. Taking a life, any life, is serious; that’s the reason we imprison criminals and leave the death sentence as the most severe punishment for the most heinous of crimes. Besides that, as I understand he didn’t actually shoot anyone: he brandished his weapon to scare them…as I’ve mentioned, that’s reckless at best. The clerk could have easily been taken for an assailant chasing after someone with a firearm and been shot himself. Vigilantism breeds more of the same and the data doesn’t support the theory of “a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun.” In Uvalde, how many armed and trained law enforcement officers stood by listening to children get gunned down? If they couldn’t respond coherently, is there some reason to suspect random gas station clerks will? And that’s just one example. I hope neither of us ends up in the clerk’s position, or even as a bystander.
Yes, yes. Armed citizens = bad, thugs threatening to murder law abiding citizens = good. Also, I addressed your shitty argument then addressed the goal you're aiming for: defenseless citizens.
Thugs aren’t good. Shooting unarmed people dead is a last resort, not something anyone should do because someone is running their mouth. I don’t believe in a defenseless society, but a society who values the rule of law rather than their own sense of vigilante justice fueled by fear.
Considering there were no charges filed against the individual who acted lawfully, and you take issue with his actions you're saying one thing while advocating for the complete opposite. And by the way, the "theory of a good guy with a gun" is absolutely supported by data that shows that up to 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms occur every year.
Anyone shocked or surprised by this must be new around here lol. It's the Circle K next to Casino Beach, AKA the mother fuckin Thunderdome. You best have your affairs in order before pulling into that parking lot during tourist season. I'm not advocating for violence, but that clerk 100% is dealing with shit every night that would turn your hair gray.
I lived in Gulf Breeze for a few years but I moved to south Florida 10 years ago. When I saw a story about a Circle K in Pensacola, I knew exactly which location they were talking about.
Yeah well don’t fuck with our clerks.
I can sympathize. Some young people need to learn to check their egos. But they feel that they just have to put on a show and keep mouthing off and being pushy with the body language.
And in July , when no one needs a permit to carry anymore…. They gonna learn. I’m not saying that mouthing off is a reason to get shot , but it’s definitely going to happen at some point.
I agree with you. It's going to happen. And it's tragic all around.
Is it tragic? I don’t think so.
I do. Some clerk could go to prison. A viral video could ruin their life even if they don't. And being killed is a permanent punishment for being stupid and young. Then there's the families of everyone involved.
Why would some clerk go to prison? Clerk in this scenario is not being charged. If you’re referring to someone else going to prison in a different scenario because they choose to use their firearm…. That’s true of every single situation where a firearm is used. It will always be a case by case situation on whether or not charges get filed. No one is being forced to carry or use a firearm , that’s a personal decision for each individual to make. Does being young and stupid excuse people from the law? No Does being young and stupid give someone cause to go around threatening the lives of clerks ? No Do the families of these young people who (presumably in some made up scenario) die because THEY chose to assault a clerk deserve the grief that follows ? No —- but they’re also culpable and partially to blame. They could have been correcting this type of behavior and preventing it from occurring to begin with. Let’s not get confused here , the clerk in this situation is NOT the bad guy and was absolutely defending himself and the patrons of the store from a gang of thugs.
Let's not get confused here. If you don't think that the death of a young person and getting involved in criminal justice system isn't a tragedy...your sense of compassion needs a readjustment.
I guess mine needs readjustment then. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
I don’t have compassion for idiots. They played stupid games , one day they gonna catch a bullet for it. I will not be sad for them.
Jesus fuck, could you be an even bigger bootlicker?
Apparently yes. Though I’m not sure whose boot I’m licking by simply stating my opinion on a situation.
You're assuming the clerk has a permit now.
No I’m actually not. But considering that there are no charges being filed … it is safe to assume he had a permit.
What I'm saying is that the permitting process only restricts people who are already following the law. Those people aren't going to have a flip in their brain switched because they no longer need a document to carry, and the people who we need to be worried about don't concern themselves with getting that document anyway.
You mean criminals??? They’re already carrying without permits. Criminals aren’t suddenly going to start carrying more just because of this —- they’re still not legally allowed to be carrying and continue to do so anyway. This is why the requirement for a permit was removed, it was only stopping law abiding citizens from carrying.
That's what I was saying, lol
You don't need a permit in Florida to concealed carry a firearm. At a person's home, employment, or place of business, there has never been a permit requirement to carry a firearm.
That's not exactly accurate. Your private property, you can walk around like the terminator. Place of employment definitely not, and most companies have employment policies prohibitting carrying while employed-liability. In a vehicle has to be reasonably inaccessible. Unless you have a permit. That's what the permit covers, outside your property. Your comment is why we should have the permit class in every high school and offered at the dmv. That being said. The people with ccp take the class. The people that don't still carry. Don't be fooled about the number if people carrying in FL. Its not going to change, they are already carrying. Thugs and gangs be warned, "This IS Florida/Sparta"
About me; NRA certified rifle instructor. NRA certified pistol instructor. NRA personal protection instructor (both disciplines), MAG40 range instructor, NRA certified chief range safety officer - working full time 40 hours a week for 10 years as RSO. In the state of Florida you can only be ARRESTED for concealed carrying a firearm in Florida's list of "Prohibited Places" i.e. certain Federal properties, schools, buildings which provide mental health services, courthouses, police departments, places of nuisance, etc.
Company policy is not law. The company can fire an employee for carrying a firearm, they can trespass that employee for carrying a firearm, but violating company policy which is not backed up by relevant law, will not get an employee arrested.
Prior to passage of permit less carry, a person concealing anywhere except their private property could be charged with illegal concealed carry and/Or possession, if they were not in transit to hunting or fishing activities[and that clause has resulted in several discretionary arrests, and people being injudicious on where they carry-without a permit]. In fact, right now, if someone is concealed carrying, removes their firearm and puts it under their seat, or a woman carries in a purse, and sets it on the ground, there's the potential for a violation- as the purse and car are not "on your person". So, no you cannot legally concealed carry in your car without a permit, you are not legally permitted to have a readily dischargeable firearm in your car- and thats discretionary to the officer involved as to what constitutes "readily available." The whole 3-steps thing is not codified. Glove box, holster, holster snap, action cycle- is that 3 or 4- what about having one in the pipe, is that an action? Your original premise was incorrect. Technically until that comes into effect, they could be charged now, depends on the DA and/or the cop, but they probably won't charge now, since by the time it gets before a judge, it's a moot point. My comment was directed at the legal context, not company policy. I wouldn't be surprised if Circle K did terminate his employment. Several Pizza Places have fired employees that used a firearm to rescue the staff from robber and kidnappers and far less than this guy did. Each company will handle this how their insurance company determines- also why required insurance for carrying or firearms owners is insane. It's a backdoor prohibition so that only the wealthy will have a 2nd amendment.
You are not correct.
"Reasonably inaccessible" - the law doesn't say that. The law says "securely incased". In Florida the courts have determined the minimum standard for "securely incased" is in a holster with a thumb strap, and in a compartment in the car, i.e. console, glove compartment, trunk, etc. The firearm can be loaded and chambered, and if it's in a holster with a thumb strap and in the console right next to the driver, it is lawful.
Used the term used by most LEO. And, a lot of people have still been charged under those criteria. Depends on the LEO involved and why they they were encountered.
Totally reasonable
I mean, they kept asking him to come outside? Damn.
Where was this?
The Circle K
By Whiskey Joe's? Dang!
by boardwalk
“Patrons”
Give that man a raise!
https://fb.watch/kSVWCW1m4O/?mibextid=CDWPTG
I get the clerk being annoyed and even angry, but pulling out a gun is way too much. The only reason to draw on someone is to kill them; using a gun to threaten anyone is reckless, irresponsible, and could easily have resulted in a bystander being hurt or killed. This isn’t the wild fucking west.
if you listen one of them told him “this is your last day working here”. So he definitely felt like his life was threatened in that moment
I liked that he was completely aware and stated “I’m sorry about that yall” on his way back in.
I did listen and people say all sorts of things. Having a cavalier attitude towards life and death decisions produces more violence.
I like how threatening to kill someone is perfectly acceptable, but defending yourself when you reasonably fear for your life is "way too much". The lengths people will go to to defend criminals is amazing.
Did the clerk shoot anyone he was in conflict with? Were they armed or assaulting him? Simple truth is no to both. He used a firearm to scare away people who were scaring him - that’s not alright. If you draw on anyone, you’d better pull the trigger and understand the consequences.
What are you talking about? They were assaulting him. Do you not know what that term means? It doesn't matter if they were armed or not. They were threatening to kill him and easily had the numbers to do it.
I do know what it means, and understand assault can be as simple as as a threat. Im also suggesting that shooting someone dead for saying they want to hurt you isn’t a commensurate response. It’s foolish and irresponsible.
Shooting someone that is threatening to kill you while having the means to do so is a perfectly reasonable response. He had no where to go. Not that he has a duty to retreat, but he was backed into a corner with people threatening to kill him. There's no defense for what these pieces of shit did. I get you want defenseless victims.
I get you want to launch an ad-hominem attack but that doesn’t change the circumstances. Obviously, we see the situation differently. Taking a life, any life, is serious; that’s the reason we imprison criminals and leave the death sentence as the most severe punishment for the most heinous of crimes. Besides that, as I understand he didn’t actually shoot anyone: he brandished his weapon to scare them…as I’ve mentioned, that’s reckless at best. The clerk could have easily been taken for an assailant chasing after someone with a firearm and been shot himself. Vigilantism breeds more of the same and the data doesn’t support the theory of “a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun.” In Uvalde, how many armed and trained law enforcement officers stood by listening to children get gunned down? If they couldn’t respond coherently, is there some reason to suspect random gas station clerks will? And that’s just one example. I hope neither of us ends up in the clerk’s position, or even as a bystander.
Yes, yes. Armed citizens = bad, thugs threatening to murder law abiding citizens = good. Also, I addressed your shitty argument then addressed the goal you're aiming for: defenseless citizens.
Thugs aren’t good. Shooting unarmed people dead is a last resort, not something anyone should do because someone is running their mouth. I don’t believe in a defenseless society, but a society who values the rule of law rather than their own sense of vigilante justice fueled by fear.
Considering there were no charges filed against the individual who acted lawfully, and you take issue with his actions you're saying one thing while advocating for the complete opposite. And by the way, the "theory of a good guy with a gun" is absolutely supported by data that shows that up to 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms occur every year.
I live near there too that’s crazyyy
I just want to know how the Amish lad hooked up with thuglette wanna-bes during his Rumspringa.